They all looked very uncomfortable when he said it, lots of shifting around in chairs and pained looks on their faces. A very odd statement and very odd reactions. My take on it is that they all know, they are just going to wait it out and hope he loses in 2012 and they don’t have to deal with it. The SCOTUS has dodged it with Chester Arthur (1880), George Romney (1968), Henry Kissinger (1974) [via Line of Succession], and countless other times since 1789, including Obama. For the US Supreme Court to declare the US Chief Executor ineligible is a very tall order. In fact, it would undoubtedly be the most far-reaching decision they would have ever made, and that's saying a lot considering the 231 years since the Constitution's ratification. HOWEVER, it's why our Framers gave us the Separation of Powers. We are obviously in uncharted territory, hence the Appeal after Appeal, as the Eligibility attorneys try to angle their legal sabers to stab in between the armor plating of Standing and Jurisdiction to kill the de-facto king (metaphorically speaking, of course). Since there will be NO help getting to the bottom of this with a Democrat Pelosi/Reid Congress, we are subject to the slow grind of the Federal Courts. Here's what it took with Nixon (courtesy of LandMarkCases.org):
Diagram of How the Nixon Case Moved Through the Court System
|
Supreme Court of the United States
In a special session, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on July 8, 1974. The case issues: 1) Do the courts have the jurisdiction to hear a case involving a dispute within the executive branch? 2) Does the president have the power of absolute privilege and, if so, does his privilege prevail over the demands of the subpoena in this case? The Court rules that it does have jurisdiction and that the president's executive privilege power is not absolute. Therefore, the president must comply with the subpoena and turn over the tapes.
United States v. Nixon (July 24, 1974)
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
President Nixon appeals the U.S. District Court decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals, which does not hear the appeal because the case moves directly to the Supreme Court of the United States. The special prosecutor asks the Supreme Court of the United States to take the case in the interest of achieving a final resolution to the case. The Court agrees to hear the case.
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. District Court
Rules against President Nixon and supports the subpoena, saying that he must turn over the tapes
United States v. Mitchell (May 20, 1974)
|
|
|
|
|
President Nixon releases edited transcripts of 43 conversations, 20 of which had been subpoenaed. President Nixon refuses to release more material and tries to ignore the subpoena.
April 30, 1974
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. District Court
Judge John Sirica issues a subpoena, ordering President Nixon to turn over certain tape recordings of specifically named advisors and aides on particular dates.
In re Subpoena to Nixon (August 29, 1973) |
|
|
